I know of one study into psychopathy where the researcher undertook the research on himself only to find that he too, was a psychopath. He was somewhat taken aback but on asking his family they said they weren’t really surprised but they loved him anyway as he was a good husband and father. He was dutiful rather than empathetic perhaps, and his affection only extended to his own immediate family. It certainly gave me food for thought....psychopathy doesn’t seem always to predict a life of criminality or being unable to sustain close relationships...it seems more nuanced than that?
I simply don’t know enough about it Penny to be honest, though I’m sorry you’ve had such terrible first hand experience. I’ve seen it written that they are over-represented in the number of CEOs compared to the % in the general population and are therefore presumably hiding in plain site. However it beats me how researchers actually know what % of the population ARE psychopathic - it’s hardly a box you’d tick in the census!
“Women estimate that about one-third of men would commit rape if there were no consequences, and about one-third of men report that they would commit rape if they believed they could get away with it.”
This is disturbing even though short of the radical feminist claim that all men are rapists.
It is chilling if not somewhat terrifying that the percentage is so high. I think we may need to query the response of some of these men however. The fantasy of rape is not the actuality - it is not some Mills & Boon scenario of bending some gorgeous quivering woman to your masculine needs - it’s cruel and bestial. Women also indulge in thoughts of such sanitised rape scenarios, a reality that feminists have difficulty coming to terms with for obvious reasons. The point is that fantasy is fantasy, few if any women would be aroused at the pain, fear and disgust of the reality. We need to take some of these statistics with a pinch of salt.
On one hand, the studies here are small low-quality studies that are likely to be among the many findings that don’t replicate.
On the other, the behavior of people in jurisdictions that have effectively “defunded the police” suggests that there are all sorts of things people will do if they believe they can get away with it.
As a gay man -- 5 years happily married and counting, but with quite some mixed experiences before being with my current partner -- I would also say that these behavioral patterns are not exclusive to opposite-sex relationships. It certainly was true for me that before meeting my current partner, many sexual encounters had a very strong component of "trophy hunting" (on both sides, to some extent). In other words, I believe that people (with men probably being more represented) use sex *to some extent* at least to demonstrate to themselves that they *would be and will be chosen*. That is, if you can get another person to agree having sex with you, it shows (to your own consciousness) your value.
It has taken me many years of my life to fully appreciate that whenever I had (and at times still now experience) a motivational drive to pursue a sexual encounter -- something I have not acted upon since being with my current partner -- that this represents a very deep seated natural impulse in humans of seeking external evaluation (recognition) of one's "market value." This is not only a useful but critical instinct. The problem with it is the unconscious translation into action (actually seeking as many sexual partners as possible in order to feel "valued" for instance).
As humans, I do not think it is possible (or the average person) to control impulses on the level of raw experience; but I think that most people would have the ability to channel these impulses into more collaborative and productive pursuits if they were able to recognize them not so much as stemming from being a bad (immoral) person, and instead are simply a more or less direct consequence of our evolutionary lineage.
Similarly to how humans have learned to overcome our murderous behaviors as a direct translation of anger and resentment impulses into destructive actions (at least most humans have...), I believe we could also learn to integrate these impulses. It is, however, necessary to bring them into the light. And demonizing men as "toxic" will rather do the opposite, in my view. I, certainly, have greatly benefited from becoming much more aware of how these impulses show up as intrusive thoughts, and that -- whenever that happens -- there are other avenues to pursue for feeling valued.
Indeed, I couldn’t agree more. It is acting upon impulses inappropriately that causes negative consequences, though of cause there is evolutionary value in men spreading their seed as widely as possible, so it is an impulse that is unlikely to be removed by ‘evolution’. I think this is probably the main driver therefore, though as you say seeking affirmation may also figure. The impulse to violence has likewise been ‘tamed’ by social evolution, at least within one’s own group. Less so when directed against outside groups...again for obvious reasons, struggle for territory, resources etc.
The accepted view of rape is that the motive is primarily a display of power rather than sexual gratification, which would reflect the high status male having many sexual options despite raping. Presumably this is also reflected in rape as a tool of terror in war situations. Does the research support this view? How would male on male rape figure into this?
I’ve never been more thankful to not have money, status, popularity, or power if those were the major justifications for men’s reprehensible conduct. Even though my Facebook description reads “former somebody,” I was never more than a medium size fish in a small pond among a gaggle of VPs.
Wow quite detailed review, whilst I fully acknowledge that men are likely to commit horrific crimes, I think the title of the book is a little biased only blaming men whilst Dr Buss mentions that dark triad women are likely to mate poach he is neglecting some serious crimes which have been committed by women, for instance a couple of months ago I was reading Carolyn Bryant Donham had died, and her legacy was falsely accusing a young innocent black boy named Emmet Till of harassing her in a shop in an segregated deep south Emmett Till was kidnapped and lynched as a result they only found him 2 weeks later , none of the preparators has spent a day in jail despite admitting it. Here in the UK a girl called Eleanor Williams falsely accused South Asian men of having raped, abused and trafficked her. In fact Eugene Kanin from Purdue a researcher back in the 90s conducted a survey in a small midwestern town where the police had resources to seriously chase every single lead and a whopping 41% turned out to be fabrication. The reasons and profiles of these preparators is widely unknown there is hardly any research on this unless anybody in the comment sections or even you Rob can provide me with?
Bisexual women who have had intimate partners of both genders have reported facing more intimate partner violence at the hands of their female partners as opposed to male partners. There is also a wide sentencing gap, female preparators of the most horrific crimes such as Karla Homolka is roaming the streets freely as we speak and has served half the sentence of her husband.
I know it sounds like I am bashing women and society and I understand that a large portion of men aren't innocent, however where does this leave men who have had no justice and where female preparators have gotten away with their crimes, when mainstream psychology doesn't discuss this and uses vague labels such as "toxic masculinity" (with the replication crisis going on in psychology it's no wonder it came to the forefront). Why did people like Andrew Tate become so popular (most googled term at one point) ,who is the alternative Dr Buss? Who I'm sure is professional but who I would say is probably saw the #metoo movement and probably saw a book deal instead of being objective.
The Buss study is one of the few in the area and it’s very hard to study. Most sources cite a small number of other sources which are very misleading, in part because they count every accusation that isn’t proven false as being true (whereas Buss made a credible effort to examine all the cases he studied and reach some kind of fact-based determination). One way of studying this would be to just to mass surveying and include among many other questions some items about asking the respondents whether they’ve told lies about the sexual conduct of another and to whom. To my knowledge, that study has never been done.
As to this book, it’s slanted but that’s the topic. It would be a good comparison to see the female-equivalent book.
Great points. The women are victims and men are predators narrative is certainly corruptive to the larger truth. It is interesting in nature how the male animal often is required to expend so much effort, energy and risk in order to mate. The same is true for the human male as females are choosy and there is competition with other males. Females that exploit this by playing cruel relationship games might cause male frustration that leads them to consider rape.
Well you should never force anybody against their will, consent should be there at all times, but yeah women are choosy and they are entitled to that. However what I disagree with is the false allegations the data has shown in particular the research by Eugene Kanin, also consent should be there however after the act if there was consent before and during the act all the way through the end of the act, it can't be withdrawn after the act. The nature of female evil is seldom covered in psychology when it does exist (I will admit women are more agreeable in general but disagreeable females exist) and it has ruined men's lives, it is hardly profiled do these women have dark triad traits, do they have a cluster B disorder, have they been profiled have formal tests been run, studies which need to be conducted by mainstream psychology. Instead we get a somewhat flimsy explanation ie women are doing it for sympathy , or men mis-interpreted the signals and here is a book about why men are bad. Also these type of women a lot of whom make false allegations are doing a disservice to real female victims if a broad percentage have been proven false a lot of genuine female victims will be taken less seriously. But hey the people pushing this narrative often have a zero sum mentality i.e. to liberate one group you must oppress another and it the same group who wonders why people like Andrew Tate became such a hit.
I understand the points you make Raj, but it is never clear cut - some women have high testosterone levels compared to the norm, they may do well in engineering or other ‘masculine’ roles, or perhaps they’ll demonstrate more physical violence than the generality of women. The reason they are rarely studied compared to men is simply because they do not take the same toll on society as do male offenders, men are both the main perpetrators AND the main victims of violence. I admit more studies on women are needed.
I think this is correct. There is a passive-aggressive tendency in females in general that gets scant attention but is a dark and destructive to others, maybe more so, than can be the violent physical act of rape. If a woman is raped, the physical and physiological trauma can heal. If a man is falsely accused of rape, his life can be shattered beyond recovery. As a point of related curiosity, what happened to the Duke Lacrosse players?
I think it both genuine victims of sexual assaults and those falsely accused of it can have their lives devasted beyond recovery yeah the duke players it seems like a long case but will have to go over it.
Thinking out loud, I wonder if there’s such a thing as an optimal amount of Dark triad traits and if it’s possible to shift it in the course of one’s life?
In both directions
As in those with too much can lower them and those with not enough can raise them
Well, let's see... Too little narcissism means that you undervalue yourself, leading you to take on fewer attainable risks and accept lower pay or prestige for your work. Too little Machiavellianism means you aren't fully utilizing the resources you have access to, even when it is explicitly to your benefit, and no detriment to others. And too little psychopathy means that you're essentially a slave to the whims of other people, unable to ignore their wants and opinions, unwilling to overturn the status quo.
Don't get me wrong, Dark Triad traits are often harmful, but they also have distinct, morally upright benefits, once diluted. If kept in check by other impulses, the Dark Triad starts to look a lot like healthy ambition. There are plenty of people who would benefit from a higher sense of self-worth, more strategic thinking about the resources available to them, and a disregard for the opinions of people surrounding them. Just, y'know, keep it in check.
“If women and men could agree in advance on a compromised middle-ground solution that was perfect for neither but acceptable for both … they could avoid many of these costs.”
Reflections by women about this statement? In my experience, men are willing but women unwilling to do this...
Yes I think Jordan Peterson has made a lot of sense but perhaps I am of a generation that represents him pushing at an open door, so to speak. I find him a breath of fresh air.
The difference between men an women both polling that they though having oral sex with another was no big deal, but that it would be a big deal if their spouse did, was telling. I don’t think many people have the emotional intelligence to project their feeling on another. It might not feel cruel in that case. Another point is that men don’t tend to have emotional connection in affairs, but women do.
I know of one study into psychopathy where the researcher undertook the research on himself only to find that he too, was a psychopath. He was somewhat taken aback but on asking his family they said they weren’t really surprised but they loved him anyway as he was a good husband and father. He was dutiful rather than empathetic perhaps, and his affection only extended to his own immediate family. It certainly gave me food for thought....psychopathy doesn’t seem always to predict a life of criminality or being unable to sustain close relationships...it seems more nuanced than that?
I simply don’t know enough about it Penny to be honest, though I’m sorry you’ve had such terrible first hand experience. I’ve seen it written that they are over-represented in the number of CEOs compared to the % in the general population and are therefore presumably hiding in plain site. However it beats me how researchers actually know what % of the population ARE psychopathic - it’s hardly a box you’d tick in the census!
Maybe the profile models assessing psychopathy are off and in need of refinement. Or there is a spectrum and not a binary determination.
“Women estimate that about one-third of men would commit rape if there were no consequences, and about one-third of men report that they would commit rape if they believed they could get away with it.”
This is disturbing even though short of the radical feminist claim that all men are rapists.
It is chilling if not somewhat terrifying that the percentage is so high. I think we may need to query the response of some of these men however. The fantasy of rape is not the actuality - it is not some Mills & Boon scenario of bending some gorgeous quivering woman to your masculine needs - it’s cruel and bestial. Women also indulge in thoughts of such sanitised rape scenarios, a reality that feminists have difficulty coming to terms with for obvious reasons. The point is that fantasy is fantasy, few if any women would be aroused at the pain, fear and disgust of the reality. We need to take some of these statistics with a pinch of salt.
On one hand, the studies here are small low-quality studies that are likely to be among the many findings that don’t replicate.
On the other, the behavior of people in jurisdictions that have effectively “defunded the police” suggests that there are all sorts of things people will do if they believe they can get away with it.
As a gay man -- 5 years happily married and counting, but with quite some mixed experiences before being with my current partner -- I would also say that these behavioral patterns are not exclusive to opposite-sex relationships. It certainly was true for me that before meeting my current partner, many sexual encounters had a very strong component of "trophy hunting" (on both sides, to some extent). In other words, I believe that people (with men probably being more represented) use sex *to some extent* at least to demonstrate to themselves that they *would be and will be chosen*. That is, if you can get another person to agree having sex with you, it shows (to your own consciousness) your value.
It has taken me many years of my life to fully appreciate that whenever I had (and at times still now experience) a motivational drive to pursue a sexual encounter -- something I have not acted upon since being with my current partner -- that this represents a very deep seated natural impulse in humans of seeking external evaluation (recognition) of one's "market value." This is not only a useful but critical instinct. The problem with it is the unconscious translation into action (actually seeking as many sexual partners as possible in order to feel "valued" for instance).
As humans, I do not think it is possible (or the average person) to control impulses on the level of raw experience; but I think that most people would have the ability to channel these impulses into more collaborative and productive pursuits if they were able to recognize them not so much as stemming from being a bad (immoral) person, and instead are simply a more or less direct consequence of our evolutionary lineage.
Similarly to how humans have learned to overcome our murderous behaviors as a direct translation of anger and resentment impulses into destructive actions (at least most humans have...), I believe we could also learn to integrate these impulses. It is, however, necessary to bring them into the light. And demonizing men as "toxic" will rather do the opposite, in my view. I, certainly, have greatly benefited from becoming much more aware of how these impulses show up as intrusive thoughts, and that -- whenever that happens -- there are other avenues to pursue for feeling valued.
Indeed, I couldn’t agree more. It is acting upon impulses inappropriately that causes negative consequences, though of cause there is evolutionary value in men spreading their seed as widely as possible, so it is an impulse that is unlikely to be removed by ‘evolution’. I think this is probably the main driver therefore, though as you say seeking affirmation may also figure. The impulse to violence has likewise been ‘tamed’ by social evolution, at least within one’s own group. Less so when directed against outside groups...again for obvious reasons, struggle for territory, resources etc.
The accepted view of rape is that the motive is primarily a display of power rather than sexual gratification, which would reflect the high status male having many sexual options despite raping. Presumably this is also reflected in rape as a tool of terror in war situations. Does the research support this view? How would male on male rape figure into this?
Willing partners? Heterosexual men can’t just flip a switch, even in times of need.
I’ve never been more thankful to not have money, status, popularity, or power if those were the major justifications for men’s reprehensible conduct. Even though my Facebook description reads “former somebody,” I was never more than a medium size fish in a small pond among a gaggle of VPs.
Wow quite detailed review, whilst I fully acknowledge that men are likely to commit horrific crimes, I think the title of the book is a little biased only blaming men whilst Dr Buss mentions that dark triad women are likely to mate poach he is neglecting some serious crimes which have been committed by women, for instance a couple of months ago I was reading Carolyn Bryant Donham had died, and her legacy was falsely accusing a young innocent black boy named Emmet Till of harassing her in a shop in an segregated deep south Emmett Till was kidnapped and lynched as a result they only found him 2 weeks later , none of the preparators has spent a day in jail despite admitting it. Here in the UK a girl called Eleanor Williams falsely accused South Asian men of having raped, abused and trafficked her. In fact Eugene Kanin from Purdue a researcher back in the 90s conducted a survey in a small midwestern town where the police had resources to seriously chase every single lead and a whopping 41% turned out to be fabrication. The reasons and profiles of these preparators is widely unknown there is hardly any research on this unless anybody in the comment sections or even you Rob can provide me with?
Bisexual women who have had intimate partners of both genders have reported facing more intimate partner violence at the hands of their female partners as opposed to male partners. There is also a wide sentencing gap, female preparators of the most horrific crimes such as Karla Homolka is roaming the streets freely as we speak and has served half the sentence of her husband.
I know it sounds like I am bashing women and society and I understand that a large portion of men aren't innocent, however where does this leave men who have had no justice and where female preparators have gotten away with their crimes, when mainstream psychology doesn't discuss this and uses vague labels such as "toxic masculinity" (with the replication crisis going on in psychology it's no wonder it came to the forefront). Why did people like Andrew Tate become so popular (most googled term at one point) ,who is the alternative Dr Buss? Who I'm sure is professional but who I would say is probably saw the #metoo movement and probably saw a book deal instead of being objective.
The Buss study is one of the few in the area and it’s very hard to study. Most sources cite a small number of other sources which are very misleading, in part because they count every accusation that isn’t proven false as being true (whereas Buss made a credible effort to examine all the cases he studied and reach some kind of fact-based determination). One way of studying this would be to just to mass surveying and include among many other questions some items about asking the respondents whether they’ve told lies about the sexual conduct of another and to whom. To my knowledge, that study has never been done.
As to this book, it’s slanted but that’s the topic. It would be a good comparison to see the female-equivalent book.
Great points. The women are victims and men are predators narrative is certainly corruptive to the larger truth. It is interesting in nature how the male animal often is required to expend so much effort, energy and risk in order to mate. The same is true for the human male as females are choosy and there is competition with other males. Females that exploit this by playing cruel relationship games might cause male frustration that leads them to consider rape.
Well you should never force anybody against their will, consent should be there at all times, but yeah women are choosy and they are entitled to that. However what I disagree with is the false allegations the data has shown in particular the research by Eugene Kanin, also consent should be there however after the act if there was consent before and during the act all the way through the end of the act, it can't be withdrawn after the act. The nature of female evil is seldom covered in psychology when it does exist (I will admit women are more agreeable in general but disagreeable females exist) and it has ruined men's lives, it is hardly profiled do these women have dark triad traits, do they have a cluster B disorder, have they been profiled have formal tests been run, studies which need to be conducted by mainstream psychology. Instead we get a somewhat flimsy explanation ie women are doing it for sympathy , or men mis-interpreted the signals and here is a book about why men are bad. Also these type of women a lot of whom make false allegations are doing a disservice to real female victims if a broad percentage have been proven false a lot of genuine female victims will be taken less seriously. But hey the people pushing this narrative often have a zero sum mentality i.e. to liberate one group you must oppress another and it the same group who wonders why people like Andrew Tate became such a hit.
I understand the points you make Raj, but it is never clear cut - some women have high testosterone levels compared to the norm, they may do well in engineering or other ‘masculine’ roles, or perhaps they’ll demonstrate more physical violence than the generality of women. The reason they are rarely studied compared to men is simply because they do not take the same toll on society as do male offenders, men are both the main perpetrators AND the main victims of violence. I admit more studies on women are needed.
Testosterone isn't the only thing, sometimes it's being a psychopath and is the toll in your mind that both male offenders take?
Indeed a possibility - we still know so little
I think this is correct. There is a passive-aggressive tendency in females in general that gets scant attention but is a dark and destructive to others, maybe more so, than can be the violent physical act of rape. If a woman is raped, the physical and physiological trauma can heal. If a man is falsely accused of rape, his life can be shattered beyond recovery. As a point of related curiosity, what happened to the Duke Lacrosse players?
I think it both genuine victims of sexual assaults and those falsely accused of it can have their lives devasted beyond recovery yeah the duke players it seems like a long case but will have to go over it.
Thinking out loud, I wonder if there’s such a thing as an optimal amount of Dark triad traits and if it’s possible to shift it in the course of one’s life?
In both directions
As in those with too much can lower them and those with not enough can raise them
Well, let's see... Too little narcissism means that you undervalue yourself, leading you to take on fewer attainable risks and accept lower pay or prestige for your work. Too little Machiavellianism means you aren't fully utilizing the resources you have access to, even when it is explicitly to your benefit, and no detriment to others. And too little psychopathy means that you're essentially a slave to the whims of other people, unable to ignore their wants and opinions, unwilling to overturn the status quo.
Don't get me wrong, Dark Triad traits are often harmful, but they also have distinct, morally upright benefits, once diluted. If kept in check by other impulses, the Dark Triad starts to look a lot like healthy ambition. There are plenty of people who would benefit from a higher sense of self-worth, more strategic thinking about the resources available to them, and a disregard for the opinions of people surrounding them. Just, y'know, keep it in check.
“If women and men could agree in advance on a compromised middle-ground solution that was perfect for neither but acceptable for both … they could avoid many of these costs.”
Reflections by women about this statement? In my experience, men are willing but women unwilling to do this...
That is supported by the data… women are much more choosy..
I’m talking about in committed monogamy
Men are made with more libido
Yes I think Jordan Peterson has made a lot of sense but perhaps I am of a generation that represents him pushing at an open door, so to speak. I find him a breath of fresh air.
The difference between men an women both polling that they though having oral sex with another was no big deal, but that it would be a big deal if their spouse did, was telling. I don’t think many people have the emotional intelligence to project their feeling on another. It might not feel cruel in that case. Another point is that men don’t tend to have emotional connection in affairs, but women do.